自一九八七年典當業在中國大陸復出後，典當業的研究再度引起關注，但是一些論著中也存在不少值得商榷之處。本文以近年發表的《中國典當手冊》及《典當史──中國典當業的歷史考證》、《中國典當業的起源和發展》等為例，對中國古代典當史的一些觀點提出商榷和批評。包括：第一，中國典當業的起源問題。第二，歷代寺院典當業的歷史。這兩個部分糾正上述論著對南北朝時期典當業暨寺院典當業發展程度的看法。第三，典當歷史發展的一般情況，糾正了對民營、官營及內府典當業發展的一些不準確敍述。第四，典當業發展過程中的業務及制度。第五，對各項具體的典當業務及制度，如典當存款、官本質貸、人口典當、滿貨處理、庫本、各種錢帖等作了辯證。本文認為：《中國典當手冊》及其他三種著作，在史料及理論方面存有失誤，其原因主要在於資料缺乏，但也與作者在此情況下急欲將之說清、說細有關。但總體而言，《中國典當手冊》仍是一部重要的行業性文獻，對今後中國典當業的經營及走向規範，應能發揮積極作用。

Since mortgage trade reappeared in China in 1987, attention has been paid again to its study. But there are shortcomings in the several works that appeared. This paper purports to comment on four of such books, including mainly The Manual of the Chinese Pawn (1998)─a text on the origins and development of the Chinese pawn. My discussion concerns the following topics: first, the origin of the Chinese pawn; second, the history of the pawn of temple; third, the different kinds of pawn in Chinese history; fourth, the business and system of the Chinese pawn; fifth, an analysis of the specific aspects of Chinese pawn, such as pawn deposit, state-owned pawn, pawn person, obsolete mortgage goods, etc. This paper points out the shortcomings of these works and explains their causes. They are caused mainly by the lack of historical materials and by the rashness of historians to jump to conclusion. The Manual, however, is still an important work that will offer references for pawn management in China today.

典當；質庫；寺院；長生庫；動產抵押；高利貸資本；存款

pawn; pawnstore; temple; ChangSheng storehouse; mortgage on estate; usurer’s capital; deposit